ReviewPatient safety in surgery2025
From error to prevention of wrong-level spine surgery: a review.
Review in Patient safety in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discordance Between Anatomical Nerve Root Compression and Functional Radiculopathy in Patients with Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Insights and Statistical Analysis of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Multicentric Retrospective Review.Asian journal of neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Surgical safety checklist implementation in a post-armed conflict country with limited resources: the Somali experience.Patient safety in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wrong-level spine surgery remains a significant concern in spine surgery, leading to devastating consequences for patients and healthcare systems alike. This comprehensive review aims to analyze the existing literature on wrong-level spine surgery in spine procedures, identifying key factors that contribute to these errors and exploring advanced strategies and technologies designed to prevent them. A systematic literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and CINAHL. The selection criteria focused on preclinical and clinical studies that specifically addressed wrong site and wrong level surgeries in the context of spine surgery. The findings reveal a range of contributing factors to wrong-level spine surgeries, including communication failures, inadequate preoperative planning, and insufficient surgical protocols. The review emphasizes the critical role of innovative technologies-such as artificial intelligence, advanced imaging techniques, and surgical navigation systems-alongside established safety protocols like digital checklists and simulation training in enhancing surgical accuracy and preventing errors. In conclusion, integrating advanced technologies and systematic safety protocols is instrumental in reducing the incidence of wrong-level spine surgeries. This review underscores the importance of continuous education and the adoption of innovative solutions to foster a culture of safety and improve surgical outcomes. By addressing the multifaceted challenges associated with these errors, the field can work towards minimizing their occurrence and enhancing patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.